Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Mythbusters, Plane on a treadmill..

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
Soon someone will come on this board and say that the mythbusters test wasn't fair, wasn't accurate, or didn't depict the myth correctly in some minor fashion.

They will realize they were wrong, but fall back on some minute detail to defend their lack of comprehension.

They will insist that they were right to think it wouldn't fly according to the myth as originaly stated.

Watch
 
Not sure its a good thing or a bad thing to admit I orginally posted the question here back like two years ago :lol

Now I want to know if someone from here sent in the question to mythbusters to get it tested.
 
Just think....this thread was probably read by Adam himself while he was reading over "thousands of internet posts about this subject."
 
COOPERVANE said:
Soon someone will come on this board and say that the mythbusters test wasn't fair, wasn't accurate, or didn't depict the myth correctly in some minor fashion.

They will realize they were wrong, but fall back on some minute detail to defend their lack of comprehension.

They will insist that they were right to think it wouldn't fly according to the myth as originaly stated.

Watch
Click to expand...

I guess that would be me then. The demonstration portrayed on the show did not meet the elements of the test in a very necessary way. Namely, the conveyor belt (tarp) was not moving as fast as the plane's wheels were moving. As evidence, you can see the traffic cones marking the takeoff distance. If the tarp was being pulled the same speed as the wheels, the plane would not have passed a single cone. Instead, it passed the last one at lift off.

The error in the test design was moving the tarp at takeoff speed and not the plane's wheel speed which was faster.

I have not yet realized an error in my original thinking and do, in fact, insist that a plane tested under the right conditions will not take off.
 
You've gotta be kidding me. Please tell me that was a joke.
 
Andy Neill said:
I guess that would be me then. The demonstration portrayed on the show did not meet the elements of the test in a very necessary way. Namely, the conveyor belt (tarp) was not moving as fast as the plane's wheels were moving. As evidence, you can see the traffic cones marking the takeoff distance. If the tarp was being pulled the same speed as the wheels, the plane would not have passed a single cone. Instead, it passed the last one at lift off.

The error in the test design was moving the tarp at takeoff speed and not the plane's wheel speed which was faster.

I have not yet realized an error in my original thinking and do, in fact, insist that a plane tested under the right conditions will not take off.
Click to expand...

So what if you thought of it in terms of a glider with a tow plane. The tow plane does a low pass (wheels not touching the ground); but, the glider sits on the treadmill. The treadmill is going the opposide direction of the tow plane and the gliders intended takeoff direction. The tow plane is the forward propulsion for the glider (the equivalent of a powered aircraft's engine).

By your theory the tow plane would just stop and fall out of the sky when attempting to pull the glider along the moving treadmill because the glider is unable to move forward because of the opposing movement of the treadmill.

The only limit I could see would be how fast the wheels can spin before ripping themselves apart. It MAY, I reapeat MAY, take a bit more thrust to get the aircraft moving initially; but, ultimately the aircrafts thust will overcome the opposed movement. The wheels would just be spinning twice as fast.

PS. Not sure I would want to get into a plane with the pilot that Adam and Jamie used. He didn't quite seem all there.
 
The error in the test design was moving the tarp at takeoff speed and not the plane's wheel speed which was faster.

I have not yet realized an error in my original thinking and do, in fact, insist that a plane tested under the right conditions will not take off.
Click to expand...
Yes and so it starts. :crying:

The fact that the aircraft overcame the normal take off speed should indicate to you that the speed of the conveyor makes absolutely no difference what so ever, uh.
 
Thank God the truck didn't go faster than 25 mph.

If Jamie hadn't been so vigilant on his speed he might have exceeded the takeoff speed of the aircraft. The aircraft would have then started going backwards creating a tsunami vortex. When the aircraft rolled off the back of the tarp the resultant forces could very well have created a black hole and none of us would be here to post today.

It was no mistake that Jamie was driving. Adam would have killed us all.
 
rumpletumbler said:
Thank God the truck didn't go faster than 25 mph.

If Jamie hadn't been so vigilant on his speed he might have exceeded the takeoff speed of the aircraft. The aircraft would have then started going backwards creating a tsunami vortex. When the aircraft rolled off the back of the tarp the resultant forces could very well have created a black hole and none of us would be here to post today.

It was no mistake that Jamie was driving. Adam would have killed us all.
Click to expand...

Dead or alive we still could have lived normally. RIGHT??
 
Andy Neill said:
I guess that would be me then. The demonstration portrayed on the show did not meet the elements of the test in a very necessary way. Namely, the conveyor belt (tarp) was not moving as fast as the plane's wheels were moving. As evidence, you can see the traffic cones marking the takeoff distance. If the tarp was being pulled the same speed as the wheels, the plane would not have passed a single cone. Instead, it passed the last one at lift off.

The error in the test design was moving the tarp at takeoff speed and not the plane's wheel speed which was faster.

I have not yet realized an error in my original thinking and do, in fact, insist that a plane tested under the right conditions will not take off.
Click to expand...

If I had a dog as ugly as you are stupid, I would shave it's a$$ and make it walk backwards...
 
There must have been a malfuntion of the flux capacitor on the 'airplane' on the show. (Note the very generous use of the term 'airplane'.)

The crux of this 'debate' is all in how the question is worded. Ferinstance, if the plane really was on a treadmill, would the crew still have to be on board 55 minutes prior to departure to do everyone else's job in getting the flight away from the gate? As welll, if the plane really had a relative motion of zero, but was boarded, with the beacon blinking and door closed, would that make Shaneekwa in the tower quit asking us "WHY YOU AINT BORDED YET?!?!" Finally, if in this same situation, i.e. engines turning, but no relative motion, would the delay ultimately be recorded as "Crew SNAFU-Late completion of checklists"?


One more time, especially you PCL, repeat after me "Bernoulli was right: no relative motion, no possible flight..."
 
Unfrackinbelievable.

All the idiots keep saying "spin the treadmill at the same speed of the wheels".

Not possible. Increasing the speed of the treadmill also increases the speed of the wheels by the same amount... infinite feedback loop until you reach ludicrous speed and go plaid and then all bets are off.
 
Andy Neill said:
I guess that would be me then. The demonstration portrayed on the show did not meet the elements of the test in a very necessary way. Namely, the conveyor belt (tarp) was not moving as fast as the plane's wheels were moving. As evidence, you can see the traffic cones marking the takeoff distance. If the tarp was being pulled the same speed as the wheels, the plane would not have passed a single cone. Instead, it passed the last one at lift off.

The error in the test design was moving the tarp at takeoff speed and not the plane's wheel speed which was faster.

I have not yet realized an error in my original thinking and do, in fact, insist that a plane tested under the right conditions will not take off.
Click to expand...

Andy Neill is so stupid he couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the directions were written on the heel.
 
ackattacker said:
Unfrackinbelievable.

All the idiots keep saying "spin the treadmill at the same speed of the wheels".

Not possible. Increasing the speed of the treadmill also increases the speed of the wheels by the same amount... infinite feedback loop until you reach ludicrous speed and go plaid and then all bets are off.
Click to expand...

Your point is so very painfully obvious, but some people just don't get it.
 
It doesn't have to be "very scientific". It's basic physics, Newton's 3rd law. The RC plane on the treadmill was more conclusive than the full-scale test.

If anything, they should've dragged the "conveyor belt" faster since the nay sayers actually believe the speed of the belt matters. They just gave them more ammo.

-Brett
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top